Lask v. Rhee-Karn
1:24-cv-02666
S.D.N.Y.Sep 3, 2024Background
- Susan Lask filed a state court action against Margaret Rhee-Karn and attorney Douglas R. Dollinger, claiming they libeled her and interfered with her client relationships.
- Defendants removed the case to federal court on diversity grounds, alleging Lask was a citizen of New Jersey or Florida, while both defendants are citizens of New York.
- Lask moved to remand, arguing the court lacked diversity jurisdiction because her citizenship was not properly established and both defendants are New York citizens.
- Defendants failed to provide evidence (address or domicile information) establishing Lask's citizenship in a state other than New York.
- The court focused solely on the issue of diversity jurisdiction, declining to address Lask’s other arguments for remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Diversity Jurisdiction | No evidence Lask is not a NY citizen | Lask is a citizen of NJ or FL, not NY | Not established; remand granted |
| Amount in Controversy | Not disputed | Threshold met by $1.1M demand | Threshold clearly met |
| Forum Defendant Rule | Both defendants are NY citizens; bar to removal | Service was improper, so rule does not apply | Not reached |
| Amending Notice of Removal | Not addressed | Should be permitted to amend | No new facts offered; amendment denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Lincoln Property Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81 (complete diversity required for § 1332)
- Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Group, L.P., 541 U.S. 567 (diversity determined at time of filing)
- Palazzo ex rel. Delmage v. Corio, 232 F.3d 38 (domicile determines citizenship for diversity)
- Taylor v. Medtronic, Inc., 15 F.4th 148 (doubts about removability resolved against removal)